Databases · head to head
DuckDB vs Evidence
DuckDB
Databases
MIT-licensed analytical SQL database that runs inside your process, with no server, no dependencies and one writer at a time.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Evidence
Business Intelligence
Business intelligence as code for teams and AI agents
- From
- $2500/month
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only DuckDB has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: DuckDB a database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.; Evidence high starting price at $2,500/month limits small team adoption
- They diverge on capability: DuckDB covers In-process execution, Evidence covers Analytics Agent.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which DuckDB and Evidence actually diverge.
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in DuckDB
- In-process execution
- Vectorised columnar engine
- Direct file querying
- Zero dependencies
- Larger-than-memory queries
- MIT licence
- Postgres-flavoured SQL
- Extension ecosystem
Only in Evidence
- Analytics Agent
- Code-based infrastructure
- Development environment
- Visualization tools
- Embedded analytics
- Enterprise security
- Multi-channel access
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
DuckDB
- Transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need Spark, replaced by SQL over Parquet in a single processnot Evidence
- Analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptablenot Evidence
- Local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehousenot Evidence
- Continuous integration and testing of analytical SQL, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anythingnot Evidence
Evidence
- Building version-controlled analytics infrastructurenot DuckDB
- Enabling AI agents to answer business questionsnot DuckDB
- Delivering analytics through multiple channels (web, Slack, ChatGPT)not DuckDB
- Embedding white-labeled analytics in productsnot DuckDB
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
DuckDB
- A database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.
- There is no network protocol, authentication or user management, so exposing it to remote clients means writing and securing your own service around it.
- It is built for scans and aggregations, not for many small transactions, so a workload of high-frequency single-row inserts and updates performs badly compared with SQLite or Postgres.
- Storage files are backwards compatible but not forwards compatible, so a file written by a newer version cannot be read by an older one and every consumer of a shared file must be upgraded together.
- Query memory settings matter: some operations still need to hold significant state, so an under-configured memory limit turns a large join or a high-cardinality aggregation into a spill-heavy query or an out-of-memory failure rather than a slow success.
Evidence
- High starting price at $2,500/month limits small team adoption
- No freemium option for evaluation or learning
- Code-based approach has steeper learning curve than visual tools
- AI credits limited on Team plan; additional credits cost extra
- Requires Git workflow familiarity for effective collaboration
Pricing, plan by plan
DuckDB
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the DuckDB review.
Evidence
$2500/month- Team$2500/month
- Unlimited users
- Monthly billing
- Analytics Agent
- Enterprise$null/custom
- All Team features
- SSO/SAML authentication
- SCIM directory sync
Which should you pick?
Choose DuckDB if
- You need in-process execution.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly.
- You also want vectorised columnar engine.
Choose Evidence if
- You need analytics agent.
- You work on Cloud, Embedded.
- You also want code-based infrastructure.
Questions people ask
- Is DuckDB or Evidence better?
- Neither clearly leads. DuckDB starts at Free and Evidence at $2500/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, DuckDB or Evidence?
- DuckDB has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for DuckDB and $2500/month for Evidence.
- Does DuckDB or Evidence run on more platforms?
- DuckDB runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly. Evidence runs on Cloud, Embedded.
- Can I use DuckDB for free?
- Yes. DuckDB has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Evidence starts at $2500/month.
- What is DuckDB best used for?
- DuckDB is most often used for transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process, analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable, local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehouse, continuous integration and testing of analytical sql, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anything. Of those, transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process and analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable are not what Evidence is typically brought in for.
- What can DuckDB do that Evidence cannot?
- DuckDB covers In-process execution, Vectorised columnar engine, Direct file querying, Zero dependencies. Evidence covers Analytics Agent, Code-based infrastructure, Development environment, Visualization tools.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
DuckDB: Can multiple applications share one DuckDB database?
Not for writing. One process holds the database read-write; others may attach read-only and will not see later writes. Shared multi-writer access needs a different database or a table format with a catalogue.
Evidence: Does Evidence have per-user pricing?
No, Evidence offers one flat price for unlimited users at $2,500/month on the Team plan with a 30-day free trial.
SourceDuckDB: Is it a replacement for a data warehouse?
For single-node analytical workloads up to a few hundred gigabytes it very often is. It is not a replacement when many concurrent users need a shared, governed, always-on service.
Evidence: How many AI credits come with Team plan?
Team plan includes 20,000 AI credits monthly at $0.01 per additional credit. Enterprise offers custom credit packages.
SourceDuckDB: Do I have to load data into it?
No. It queries Parquet, CSV, JSON and Arrow in place, including on object storage. Its own storage format is optional and mainly useful when you want indexes, constraints and faster repeated access.
Evidence: What is included in the Enterprise plan?
Enterprise adds SSO/SAML, SCIM directory sync, row-level access rules, embedding capabilities, and custom deployment options at custom pricing.
SourceDuckDB: What is MotherDuck's relationship to it?
MotherDuck is a separate company offering a managed and hybrid service built on the DuckDB engine. DuckDB itself remains MIT-licensed and independent of it, with the IP held by the DuckDB Foundation.
DuckDB: Is it suitable for OLTP?
No. It is designed for analytical scans. For transactional workloads with frequent small writes, SQLite or Postgres is the right tool.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- DuckDB vs SingleStore
- DuckDB vs SQLite
- DuckDB vs PostgreSQL
- DuckDB vs Cockroach Labs
- DuckDB vs Airtable
- DuckDB vs Amazon Aurora
- DuckDB vs ClickHouse
- DuckDB vs Apache Druid
- DuckDB vs Firebolt
- DuckDB vs OpenSearch
- DuckDB vs StarRocks
- DuckDB vs DataGrip
- DuckDB vs Estuary
- DuckDB vs Apache Pinot
- DuckDB vs Apache Pulsar
- DuckDB vs Cassandra
- DuckDB vs CouchDB
- DuckDB vs Cube
- DuckDB vs Zenlytic
- DuckDB vs Hex
- DuckDB vs Fabi
- DuckDB vs Phocas
- DuckDB vs Rill Data
- DuckDB vs GoodData
- DuckDB vs Grow
- DuckDB vs Sisense
- DuckDB vs MicroStrategy
- DuckDB vs Anaplan
- DuckDB vs Deepnote
- DuckDB vs Chartio
- DuckDB vs ChartMogul
- DuckDB vs Dundas BI
- DuckDB vs Exa
- DuckDB vs Glassbox
- Evidence vs SingleStore
- Evidence vs SQLite
- Evidence vs PostgreSQL
- Evidence vs Cockroach Labs
- Evidence vs Airtable
- Evidence vs Amazon Aurora
- Evidence vs ClickHouse
- Evidence vs Apache Druid
- Evidence vs Firebolt
- Evidence vs OpenSearch
- Evidence vs StarRocks
- Evidence vs DataGrip
- Evidence vs Estuary
- Evidence vs Apache Pinot
- Evidence vs Apache Pulsar
- Evidence vs Cassandra
- Evidence vs CouchDB
- Evidence vs Cube
- Evidence vs Zenlytic
- Evidence vs Hex
- Evidence vs Fabi
- Evidence vs Phocas
- Evidence vs Rill Data
- Evidence vs GoodData
- Evidence vs Grow
- Evidence vs Sisense
- Evidence vs MicroStrategy
- Evidence vs Anaplan
- Evidence vs Deepnote
- Evidence vs Chartio
- Evidence vs ChartMogul
- Evidence vs Dundas BI
- Evidence vs Exa
- Evidence vs Glassbox